DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
JRJZ
Docket No:
28 February 2001
6102-00
_-
This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the
provisions of title 10 of the United States Code, section 1552.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive
session, considered your application on 11 January 2991. Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures
applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Documentary material considered by the Board
consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your
naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the
evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
The Board found that on 26 March 1999, the Physical Evaluation Board determined that you
were unfit for further service because of multiple right ankle sprains and right knee
patellofemoral pains syndrome, which were rated at a combined 20%. You Accepted those
findings on 12 April 1999, and were subsequently discharged by
physical,disability
RE-
with entitlement to disability severance pay. You were assigned a reenlistment code of
3P, to indicate that you require a waiver of physical disqualification in order to reenlist.
reaSOn of
The Board noted that your discharge was based, in large part, on your subjective complaints
of chronic lower extremity pain. The fact that your symptoms have subsided and you are
presently medically qualified for enlistment was considered insufficient to demonstrate that
your discharge in 1999 was erroneous.
The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be
taken. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new
and material evidence or other matter not previously considered by the Board. In this
regard, it is important to keep in mind that a presumption of regularity attaches to all official
records. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the
burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
Sincerely,
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
--
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06922-07
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 10 July 1997 at age 23. on 19 May 1999, you were diagnosed with...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 02436-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 August 2003. Although you had symptoms of spinal pathology prior to your release from it does not appear that you were unfit for duty at active duty, that time. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02290-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 February 2002. Unlike the VA, the military departments are permitted to assign disability ratings only in those cases where the service member has been found unfit for duty. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08089-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 July 2001. Effective 9 March- 1999, the VA awarded you a 20% rating for your lower back condition, 10% for your varicose veins, and 10% for a condition of your cervical spine. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06432-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 April 2002. Notwithstanding those findings, the VA awarded you a 60% rating under VA cod 5293, effective from 17 July 1999, for pronounced intervertebral disc disease, which is the highest permitted rating for that condition. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04458-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 January 2011. As noted above, you were found fit for duty by the PEB, and you accepted that finding, which suggests that you felt that you were fit for duty at that time. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01431-01
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. You were discharged on 19 February 1999, by reason of a condition, not a disability, interfering with your performance of duty. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04224-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 January 2012. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08032-07
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 4 October 2000. The VA denied your request for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04664-10
R three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 February 2011. In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that you were fit for duty on 31 March 1998 and therefore discharged in error, the Board concluded that there was no basis for correcting your record to show that you received a more favorable reentry code than RE-3P. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...